How Summorum Pontificum was blocked and trampled on in Buenos Aires: facts, not fantasy and disinformation

Summorum is "implemented" in Buenos Aires
- it says so right here in my travel guide!

Wow, people who know nothing of the Argentine situation suddenly know a lot. It really is not enough to know what dulce de leche is or that it is the land of the tango to be aware of what goes on in Buenos Aires. And some are spreading disinformation about a diocese they do not even know! Unbelievable. But let us go back to facts not from gringos but from our porteño correspondents who know, live and suffer them.

First, we never said that Summorum had not been applied anywhere in Argentina. Cardinal Bergoglio was not the only Bishop of the whole of Argentina, but the Archbishop of Buenos Aires. Naturally, his powers were limited to the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, which is territorially very small, limited to the area of the Federal Capital itself*** - and, even then, not in the churches of the Military Ordinariate, as in all countries. So what happened there that prompted us to say that the application of Summorum in that archdiocese was "non-existent" and Marcelo González to speak that, "a sworn enemy of the Traditional Mass, he has only allowed imitations of it in the hands of declared enemies of the ancient liturgy"?

Ah, say the Google-searchers whose only experience of Argentina was watching Evita in one of their Broadway trips, he "allowed" a Summorum mass immediately after it went into effect: there it is, in this Clarín report - sent by many readers and posted by many... Well, under Summorum, a bishop does not "allow" or "implement" anything - that was the Ecclesia Dei regimen. Naturally, under Ecclesia Dei, nothing was "allowed" in Buenos Aires, even though Argentina has the largest traditional Catholic community in South America. Anyway, under Summorum, a place was designated by the Archdiocese in the church of San Miguel Arcángel.

Quite a relief, right? As a matter of fact, that was just the beginning of the problems. The Mass was celebrated only on the Fourth Sunday of each month in the crypt of the church of San Miguel Arcángel. And more, as reported in 2010 by Página Católica, a most trusted blog on Argentine Catholic affairs that has been in our blogroll since its beginning:

[C]ontrary to what common sense dictates and Ecclesia Dei clarified, Father Dotro [the "chaplain" for the Traditional Mass specifically chosen by Abp. Bergoglio] follows the calendar of the Ordinary Form, reading, therefore, the lessons of this form. But, as he does not limit himself to this innovation, he does not read them, but has them read by the faithful. The modified Mass is therefore left without the Epistle, Gradual, or Gospel.

As informed by the media [as informed above by the Clarin article], on September 16, 2007, the first day in which it was celebrated by who would soon be the Chaplain of the traditionalists, some one hundred people filled the Crypt of San Miguel. [...] From the one hundred people who were present in the Mass on the first day, not more than two or three are left... Once a month! Because liturgical "modernism" is not in the interest of the faithful who adhere to tradition. For that, it is enough, and more [than enough], the number of parishes of Buenos Aires that, under the watch of the Cardinal-Primate, do as they please in the Ordinary Form. Father Dotro and his superior, who cannot ignore what is going on, in this way mock traditionalists about whom they should care.

The poor blogger, so he would not be accused of falsifying anything, even recorded the new (1970) lectionary lessons read out in the once-a-month mass... [A full translation of the post should be posted by us soon.]

And so what was the great and generous application of Summorum Pontificum in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires? One Novus Ordo-TLM hybrid once a month. And, as it happens to any badly celebrated Latin Mass, the number of attending faithful fast dwindled from one hundred to a handful. And, naturally, it was discontinued. So, as correctly mentioned in WikiMissa, there is currently not a single actual Traditional Mass strictly according to the 1962 Missal celebrated by diocesan priests of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires. And every priest who tried to truly implement Summorum in his parish - that is, out of their own initiative, without "authorization" from the Bishop - was ordered to stop. It is what happened to a poor priest who tried to do it in the chapel of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, in October 2007, and was personally ordered by the Archbishop to stop in November 2007. [The complete post of this shameful event, also mentioned by Página Católica, in a 2011 post, will also be translated and posted shortly.]

That is how the then-Archbishop applied Summorum in his diocese. Now, will that have any influence in his current Supreme position? We shall see. We certainly do have a very liturgical new pope, with determined liturgical views, implemented from his very first minutes as pope. Whether these views will be pleasing to some who are now criticizing us is an altogether different matter. On the other hand, those who are used to bending will certainly have no problem with the changes.

*** This is also important: the diocesan Traditional Masses mentioned by dear Fr. Finigan as occurring in Argentina do not include any in the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires precisely because there are not any there, which is limited to the Federal Capital (Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, which, despite the name, is outside Buenos Aires Province, in a situation comparable to that of the District of Columbia and Maryland). The three mentioned by him are in Buenos Aires Province: Villa Celina (La Matanza Partido, Diocese of San Justo), Rawson (Chacabuco Partido, Diocese of Mercedes-Luján), and La Plata (Capital of the Province of Buenos Aires, Archdiocese of La Plata). The Archbishop's territory became a Summorum-free zone.

Can you (or your readers) clarify a couple questions about the situation? (1) You say "no diocesan priests are saying the TLM in Buenos Aires". But are there are any monasteries/orders (non-SSPX) saying it? I'm here in St. Louis, MO. Even when we had now-Cardinal Burke as Archbishop, we didn't have many diocesan priests saying the TLM. We have the Institute of Christ King running one parish with TLM's, and another led by Benedictines. Not that Burke would have ever discouraged it, but just because Diocesan priests aren't saying the TLM, it is possible it is still provided for.

(2) How close in distance are the masses in Buenos Aires province that aren't part of the Archdiocese? Not that it is an excuse, but if there are several just across the border from the Archdiocese, is it possible Catholics attached to the TLM were happy with those and not requesting new TLM's in Buenos Aires proper? The majority of the Belleville, IL diocese is less than a 10 minute drive from about 5 St. Louis parishes. It would certainly be possible to drive to those without too much hardship (although it is further to the TLM - about 20-25 minutes).

Again, I know nothing of the situation in Buenos Aires (other than what I read here and other blogs). I am simply trying to relate to a situation I am familiar with. I would appreciate further explanations on the subject. Thanks!

May God bless you NC and all the Rorate Caeli contributors for this. I can only imagine the abuse you have and will suffer for the sake of the truth in these matters. I can not properly express the consolation this blog has provided me during these difficult times.

My heart breaks for the poor faithful in Buenos Aires, having suffered through the banishment of the devout priest that dared to bring the TLM to the rural parish I attend, I can empathize.

I don't know how much of this is true, or if it is relective of our new pope's position, but assuming it is true , perhaps he recognizes the deep division that radical traditionalism is brining to the church and took steps to preempt such division with his jurisdiction. Part of me hopes this is true and that he puts a quick stop to the shenanigans of the SSPX before they can deceive any more of the faithful.

My question would be, from the reigns of Leo XIII, say, to Pius X, to Benedict XV, to Pius XI, to Pius XII...how much different was there in liturgical, shall we say, "style" (as opposed to the rubrical changes in the Missale). I suspect there were relatively few changes, and that there was demonstrable continuity. Nowadays...I would argue at least in part because of the very nature of the 1970 Missale, individual style is very much a consideration. You can use the same Missale and have a very different effect indeed, as evidenced from the frankly drastic change in change in, as some have noted, less than twenty-four hours. I am saddened to find myself in agreement with those who think the early signs do not bode well for those of liturgical sensibility...but then again, this is the first pope of the Novus Ordo (ordained December, 1969, when the Ordo Missae was already out).

Folks, face it, Pope Benedict XVI was an abberation. He was not selected because of his views on the Liturgy, but in SPITE of his views on the Liturgy.

Liturgically, Pope Francis is well within the mainstream of the Church. So yes, we should see a step back. Hopefully Pope Benedict gave us 2 steps forward, and Pope Francis will only bring us 1 step back. But it may be a full 2-step retreat.

The only way to win the Liturgical battle is from ground up, over time: family by family, priest by priest. It will take at least another generation. If not two.

Let us just hope and pray that we are at least left alone - that the work of the FSSP, ICK, and traditional diocesan priests can continue.

It remains a mystery to me how modern prelates (and not just Pope Francis - it is a widespread phenomenon) can be morally and doctrinally orthodox (at least as far as we can tell) and yet simultaneously believe that the Holy Mass is nothing more sacred than a MacDonald's Happy Meal. Is this simply the radical legacy of the Novus Ordo, the complete break between the Lex Orandi and the Lex Credendi? No matter what good is contained in the homilies such men preach, or whatever letters they write, their actions at Mass undo all this good in 15 minutes. When you act like a clown at Mass, or simply smile stupidly while others act this way around you, you turn the Church into a ship of fools, and all but fools abandon ship.

Two points: 1) From what I have seen Francis I is only a tad more healthy than Benedict XVI (he's not using the papal push cart yet). It would be amusing if he retires in a few years and sets up retirement in the Vatican with Benedict. 2) When Obama was re-elected president there was much said about how the (American) nation had finally tilted in a negative direction. Two thirds of the cardinals voted for Francis I which says which way the college has tilted too. Not promising in my book. As to liturgics: watch if the "Benedictine arrangement" of crucifix and candlesticks is quietly replaced with a flower arrangement and two candles shoved to the corner of the altar. Poor Mon. Marini must be in shock, I am most sorry for him.

What we will see from someone who definitely got the votes of Cardinals Mahony, Daneels, and Sodano:- return of the bland and mediocre NO masses. - removal of the likes of Card. Burke (they'll find a diocese for him in US) and Guido Marini. - dismantling of anything Papal and emphasis on being just one of the Bishops. - a condemnation of free market economies. - stronger ties to Obama regime. - no punishments for the likes of Mahony. Pope Francis was elected precisely so that Mohonys of this College are safe and sound till the end. If one thinks otherwise, they'd need to sober up.

Scary! What will the Brick by Brick crowd say now? Where is Father Z's "Marshall Plan for the Church" now? Did that mysterious "Plan" even exist in the first place or was it a figment of Father Z's imagination?

"Eight years of work and gradual restoration, drastically reset to the era of JPII in less than one day. "

If these are the changes our new pope is going to make in a day, dare I ask what changes might take place in a year, or five or even ten???

This pope frightens me. Remember the Vatican II phrase "noble simplicity"? I think we're about to witness simplicity to the extreme with Pope Francis. Anything that is too "traditional" or looks expensive is going to be tossed away. I can envision a wood table altar in St. Peter's Basilica. The benedictine altar arrangement is sure to be discarded.

The cardinal electors wanted to reform the curia. Yes, well you're going to get much more reform than you bargained for.

I talked at lunch with two young Argentine priests who teach at our seminary. Both of them had first-hand anecdotes about how bad things were in the BA archdiocese under Bergoglio. They have been filliing my inbox with all sorts of documentation for his antics.

Bergoglio sounds like the reincarnation of the 70s, post-V2 Bernardin bishop, complete with the fake-humble, sell the mansion, take-the-bus shtick. It's astounding, even to me, that B16's appointees would elect someone like this. It's as if they want a complete reversal.

It should be clear by now that hope cannot hinge on the curia or the pope or any other model of 'top-down' reform. Hope hinges on the willingness of traditionalist priests to evangelize and serve the mass far and wide, whether it is approved by the local bishop or not. That's how the protestantizers--neocats, charismatics, etc.--did it and that's the only way in which their damage will be reversed.

The vestments that he wears today are not the most beautiful, but they are vestments worn by Pope Benedict. Moreover, Benedict's positioning of the Cross and his usual arrangement of six (gold) candlesticks (*not* something often seen in JP2's time) is maintained.

I have no concerns whatsoever about the continued growth of the TLM under our new Pope Francis. He will not do anything to undermine the freedom Pope Benedict granted to the TLM. And unlike Pope Benedict, I would not be at all surprised to see Pope Francis publicly offer a TLM some day.

Seriously.

The man has a deep devotion to Our Lady of Fatima, practices the Five first Saturday Devotions, and prays 15 decades of the Rosary each day.

After he meets with Pope Emeritus Benedict, reads the 300 page dossier on the VatiLeaks scandal, and reads the rest of the Third secret of Fatima, he will be a different man than he was as Archbishop, then Cardinal, in Argentina.

He just strikes me as the type who, once he learns something is the Lord’s Will, he will simply make it his own. I suspect under the influence of our Pope Emeritus and the rest of the Third Secret we will be pleasantly surprised by his pontificate.

I tried to track down the TLM locations in all of Argentina. I found SSPX locations and locations for the CMRI (who are sedes). I found no regular TLM locations noted on Una Voce Argentina. I found a website for 'approved TLM's' that stated there are none in the Republic of Argentina.

Then there is the Google Map. I did not click on each location marked there but did click on a sampling of 3 or 4 locations marked. I was not able to verify those listed in the sampling. In fact, one loation directed itself back to another Una Voce association and their website no longer exist - perhaps they have a new website? Or did they disban?

From my little research, it appears that there are no TLM's in the Diocese of Buenos Aires which was run by Cardinal Bergoglio. There may be some in other parts of Argentina but I cannot verify how often they occur. Looking at the google map, I think it possible that some of the TLM's note may be one time events and not regular events.

We need more info to form a true judgement. That said, if these Masses occur regularly, it does seem it should be easy to track them down. The fat that it is not may indicate that the TLM is not readily available in other parts of Argentina as well.

We were all hoping the Restoration would come from the Pope newly elected. Part of it may be, but not the part that we have first and foremost in mind.

The truth is that, if we are right about the rottenness of the modern Church due to disastrous policy changes and the creation of a new new theology to support those changes, we really are going to have to wait until there is virtually nothing left of the modern Church, at which point the remnant takes over.

Pity. I thought the Restoration might happen in my lifetime. Now I think not.

In the meantime I shall do my best to love, pray for and support Pope Francis as far as I am able.

Father Zuhlsdorf will probably block my comment, but here is what I just posted on his blog, in the entry where he offers false information based on the Clarín article about the first TLM:

"Father,

Not exactly, no.

Rorate Caeli, a blog listed on this blog’s sidebar, has this information in a brand new article called “How Summorum Pontificum was blocked and trampled on in Buenos Aires: facts, not fantasy and disinformation”:

(1) although Argentina has the largest traditionalist community in South America, no TLM was permitted by Card. Bergoglio in the Archiocese of Buenos Aires under the Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei;

(2) when Summorum Pontificum was issued, then Card. Bergoglio arranged for a TLM in 48 hours but this was a mutilated TLM as Card Bergoglio ordered the readings to be done using the Novus Ordo Calendar and Lectionary, so the readings were not of the Mass, and not of the 1962 Missal;

(3) instead of their being TLMs in the parishes, Card. Bergoglio actively suppressed priests who tried to implement Summorum Pontificum, and ordered them to stop the Masses. Instead, as if the Ecclesia Dei regime was still in force, Cardinal Bergoglio appointed a TLM chaplain, unfriendly to Tradtion, that celebrated the mutilated TLM with Novus Ordo readings ONCE A MONTH in a crypt;

(4) Cardinal Bergoglio, it is important to remember, wasn’t the Archbishop of all of Argentina, only of the City of Buenos Aires. The City of Buenos Aires, Federal Capital, is not to be confused with the Province of Buenos Aires (just like, say, one cannot confuse Washington State with Washington, DC). Buenos Aires Province surrounds Buenos Aires City, but the City is not a part of the Province (so Buenos Aires Province is like Maryland, whereas Buenos Aires City is like Washington DC). The Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, over which Card. Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, presided, included only the territory of the Federal Capital, Buenos Aires City. And then again, there was the jurisdiciton of the Military Ordinary, etc. While there are now TLMs under Summorum Pontificum in Buenos Aires Province, there is no TLM in Buenos Aires City under the jurisdiction of the Buenos Aires Archdiocese. So Card. Bergoglio’s Archdiocese soon became again a Summorum Pontificum free zone.

(5) Why? Because on the first TLM there were more than 100 people in attendance, but the TLM being only once a month, only in the crypt of one single Church in the whole City, and, especially, because it was not a true TLM, but a mutilated mixture of TLM and Novus Ordo with Novus Ordo calendar and readings, the numbers fell, and, when only a handful of people remained, the Archdiocese cancelled the TLMs. And by prohibiting individual initiatives by priests who wanted to pray the TLM in their churches, Cardinal Bergoglio effectively killed the application of Summorum Pontificum in the area under his jurisdicion."

I don't know much about the situation in Buenas Aires either. However, even if the TLM were permitted by other groups/orders, that doesn't change the fact that His Holiness was "violently" opposed to his priests saying the TLM. I think this is NC's point. The closer any TLM locations are to his former diocese without being inside it would seem to indicate what is presented as His Holiness' attitude toward the TLM.

Former Pope Benedict laid the groundwork for the liturgy and those motu proprios remain. Pope Francis is more interested in cleaning up bureaucracy than in the Liturgy and perhaps this is what is needed in the Vatican at this time. Before continuing the onslaught of accusations, why not ask Una Voce Argentina to send you an article on the situation down there to give you some context to what occurred in Buenos Aires. It would be nice to know how mobilized the laity actually were in that city. Perhaps the new Bishop there will be able to do something which the former could not. Buenos Aires is not the only diocese in the world with clergy hesitant to do the Mass: it could also be a lack of trained clergy interested in it as well. Without a devoted priest with well organized laity it just won't happen.

For the life of me I don't understand how some prelates have such disdain for such a beautiful mass. It's treated as it were a black mass. This mass has nourished saints, martyrs and virgins. And they brought the table back? ughh

Except for Schonborn, Bergoglio is the worst possible choice to sit in the Chair of Peter. That is if you want Catholic orthodoxy and tradition restored to Holy Mother Church. I'm still in shock about him being elected pope.

Frankly speaking, it is not just in Buenos Aires we have hybrid Masses - the way some Indult Societies say it begs a few questions too - High Mass "dialogue masses"; semi-High masses; vernacular hymns throughout; badly done Missa de Angelis with no Proper of the Sunday; Epistle and Gospel in vernacular only with other rubrics ignored; people sitting, standing, kneeling ad lib and even Holy Communion standing with other rubrical omissions and priests mumbling the Latin not saying it.

When I was serving Holy mass for The SPX in UK a few years ago the rubrics of Holy Mass were respected properly.

With disicipline lacking generally throughout do people seriously think that under the last papacy hybridsation was not the goal? It was and this cannot be denied. Just because the "trappings" of tradition were becoming apparent does not mean to say we were going to avoid the inevitable liberal approach to The Latinised Mass of the New Age.

I saw where Joe Biden will be in attendance next Tuesday and the instillation Mass. I wander if Pope Francis will deny Biden communion, or if it will be business as usual. I hope the former, how much more scandal can the faithful truly take.

I am from Capital Federal and I was desolated yesterday.But now, reading his first homily, I am recovering a litle grain of hope.And that is because this: Bergoglio, as an Archbishop in his homilies, never, but never, spoke about the Cross or the Devil in the terms that he preached now.Therefore, maybe, I want to believe, the same miracle could hapen to him regarding litury.Nick.

We were all hoping the Restoration would come from the Pope newly elected. Part of it may be, but not the part that we have first and foremost in mind. The truth is that, if we are right about the rottenness of the modern Church due to disastrous policy changes and the creation of a new new theology to support those changes, we really are going to have to wait until there is virtually nothing left of the modern Church, at which point the remnant takes over.

Pity. I thought the Restoration might happen in my lifetime. Now I think not.

In the meantime I shall do my best to love, pray for and support Pope Francis as far as I am able.

Thank you so much Benedict. I am s young man, I've seen your commentso n the Catholic Herald, I love the Mass of Ages and detest the heresies of Vatican II, Balthasar, Rahner, Lubac etc, I love and admire the SSPX, but now I think of Evelyn Waugh's quote 'servig the last Mass for the last Pope in the catacombs at the end of the world'.

In the San Miguel diocese (Buenos Aires province, one our trip by car from Buenos Aires city) we have at least two or three TLM every sunday. will this go on? We do not know. The bishop, a Bergoglio´s protegée, was quite generous during BXVI pontificate, what will he do now? Bergoglio did every effort possible to ban the Summorum application. But he is now Pope, and it is not the same. He can´t use terror as he was used to.

Watcher, there are regular parishes (not FSSPX)in the province of Buenos Aires and other provinces, where the S. P. V. mass is celebrated regularly every sunday.But you won't find them in internet.They may not be quite numerous, but, there are some around.I personally know about four or five.Of course, Bergoglio has nothing to do with them.Nick.

Mass days are not regular and it seems the location changes with the dates/times of the Mass. It appears that this site also covers several others mentioned on the Google Maps site, and other locations not in Argentina too.

I am the main author of the map, and the locations are, as far as I know, correct as of end of 2012, being the map created with help of a member of Una Voce Argentina. The masses are generally celebrated weekly, and in one case at least, was being celebrated daily.

Here we go - this appears to be the official list of the TLM's in all of Argentina. It does not look like any in Buenos Aires - which we already knew and the list is smaller than the one on Google Maps.

I saw all the pics from the first Mass here: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=582972108381064&set=a.582947338383541.1073741864.496909843653958&type=1&ref=nf

Here are my first reactions:

1. HUGE disappointment that he had to set up a table in the poor chapel. Though it had a nice frontal. That is what Marini had power to salvage from the situation.

2. FLABBERGASTINGLY HUGE disappointment that he ditched the fanon. That sends as clear a signal as anything: he wants to be seen as a simple bishop, as little more than a "first among equals". Of course he won't deny the doctrine of Papal supremacy and infallibility, just exercise the office in a more low-key way.

3. On the positive side, he kept the crucifix in the centre of the altar, Communion was given in the traditional manner, and the vestments could have been much worse.

All in all, we are nowhere near to being back to square JP2. One could not have hoped that Pope Francis would take over Pope Benedict's liturgical style wholesale. Time will tell if he is trying to find a balance between Wotylian and Ratzingerian liturgy or if he will eventually roll back the Ratzingerian project completely. Either way, this pope is of a generation that is aging and at some point, that section of young priests who have been inspired by Ratzinger will increase in influence.

The traditionalist movement will not go away, thanks to the Holy Ghost's coup de grâce in getting Ratzinger elected. Mind you, the Holy Ghost went out on a limb here, as the Ratzingerian restoration came at the cost of continued organizational chaos in the Curia. God willing this will be amended by Pope Francis, though this will be at a price too. God has gone out on a limb in the first place by seeking to redeem our poor souls, and that was and is a painful and messy business.

There was bewilderment on EWTN yesterday evening at this choice and this has been echoed on the neo-con blogs today. Where does this leave Fr.” Z” or “The Hermeneutic of Continuity”? Bizarrely, this election looks like a defensive play. Another bail-out for the ‘too big to fail’ Vatican Council. Perhaps this will bring an end to papaltory which has so characterised the Benedictine years and the internet sub-culture which underpinned it.

"In the meantime I shall do my best to love, pray for and support Pope Francis as far as I am able."

Hi Benedict. Good to see you are still around; I remember you from years back on Holy Smoke. I echo your sentiments. I was disappointed myself at this election, but as Catholics it certainly is our duty to pray for the Pope and support him in all good he does, and though we are allowed to try to correct him if we believe he is off track on something we should only do so charitably and respectfully and after much prayer and reflection - because chances are that we are the ones in the wrong. This is, I believe, the only proper attitude for a Catholic.

God will see to everything. The Popes resided in Avignon for 70 years, but finally returned to Rome. The mediaeval Church laboured under tendencies to simony and corruption for the better part of 400 years, but was reformed in the end. There is one of the virtues that Traditionalists could cultivate more, and that is Patientia. God is only getting started with us.

I want to thank Prof Basto for the summary which I am using on my blog.

I had a sinking feeling last night regarding the details of his prayers, etc. and now I am very more saddened. I am also saddened how he is already divisive in his presence just by the blog reactions and twitter reactions against us traddies.

There are many sad undertones here and there which are driving us into camps more than ever before...

Sadly I find myself less and less at Father z`s site. No loss for Father, but for me, as I have almost always enjoyed his site.I am praying for the Pope Francis. I refused to make any negative comments when many were throwing a nutty.I prayed for peace, to rejoice in the New Holy Father.Dear God MercyI however NEED Honest ReportingEven if it is ugly, let it be honest. Save the cheerleading, I don`t need it. I am Roman Catholic I do my cheerleading in prayer.I had just viewed a big head Mass by our New Pope {no comment} I checked Father Z and their he is railing on the SSPX again {I don`t attend the SSPX}Really Father? I LOVE the TLM and all it stands for! Mercy Jesus Mercy.Thank you Rorate for the NEWS in Full.

Someone herein asked how a doctrinally orthodox cleric can lack liturgical awareness. I too used to wonder, but no longer.

For one, their orthodoxy is in reality severely limited. It is not accurate to treat doctrinal orthodoxy apart from liturgical orthodoxy. Therefore, on closer inspection, one will inevitably find a lack of orthodoxy. (Almost without fail in the matter of religious liberty.)

The baseline problem, in my view, is the very one that reared its ugly head in the Garden of Eden; namely, it amounts to a hyper-inflated view of human dignity that ultimately is imagined to exist as a static resident characteristic of human beings apart from God.

This is the prevailing view of the popes from John XXIII forward, with Benedict just beginning to show small signs of moving beyond this diabolical trap.

Read the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It's humanist rubbish that the aforementioned popes have praised as if written by the finger of God Almighty, and it is precisely this mindset, IMO, that allows a prelate to appear orthodox yet with little to no liturgical sense whatsoever.

Certain actions of the Holy Father apear to be comendable,like care of the poor and standing up against thuggish goverment.However, if you just provide bread for their bellies,the next day they'll be hungry again.If the moral and spiritual formation coupled up with usefull and practical knowledge is lacking, than the poor end up like thugs.Why traditional and not modern church? The answer is simple: traditional approach gives sense of perspective, identifies clearly friends and enemies of God and joined with Holy Scripture, personal and professional development and culture sanctifies and saves the catholic soul.His mind becomes formidable bullwark aganst lie, decieving, manipulation and hoax.That is what our enemies dread and fear! When the apostles spread the church they also imprinted on Her Jewish carisma of managment. It is a devine gift for the preservation. The excelence, which some traditional catholic posses is the result of tradition at work. Well, dear catholics, dig deeply into that treassure and you'll notice the tranformation right before your eyes. It is just so simple, but not simplistic, it is just plain common sense!

Well, even despite this latest post, it seems RC and NC are still taking a kicking. Perhaps a day like this in the (Traditional) Catholic blogosphere was always inevitable (this media phenomenon really only emerged in the pontificate of Benedict XVI, and so this is the first day of CathBlogs in the post-Benedictine era). And it has been truly illuminating. We're now starting to see what an easy ride the Traditional Catholic blogosphere had under Pope Benedict. Well done NC for the straight talk. That RC is - and always has been - founded on both veritas and caritas should be clear for all to see. However, it seems that the specifically logical order - veritas before caritas - is not so welcomed by all. Keep on keeping on.

SuperTradMum wrote:"I want to thank Prof Basto for the summary which I am using on my blog.

I had a sinking feeling last night regarding the details of his prayers, etc. and now I am very more saddened. I am also saddened how he is already divisive in his presence just by the blog reactions and twitter reactions against us traddies.

There are many sad undertones here and there which are driving us into camps more than ever before..."

Some of you guys and gals are too prone to despair and/or fury; maybe it's the anonymity of 'blogs. Can we at least wait until our FSSP parish is padlocked or our pastors are mailed a hybrid missal before we start crying?

You all survived Advent I 1969, Bl.JPII, got Ecclesia Dei, BXVI, and SP/UE; but, now that we have as pope the groovy guy 95% of us have had as bishop at one point or another (seriously, how are they all the same?!--how does the Sistine Chapel not explode when they all meet clones of themselves?), suddenly it's praevalebunt time! So he doesn't force his pastors to offer the TLM and doesn't like the ones that do offer it; big deal, welcome to everywhere on Earth other than the U.S. and a few other countries. Many Anglo-phones wrongly universalize the rapidity of traditional progress we've experienced in our lands: that's not the case for the rest of the world.

I think we ought perhaps to focus on our successes and the broader trends--of course, keeping the pressure on by supporting truth-before-charity 'blogs like RC. All I'm suggesting is let's wait for persecution and not seek it out.

while I have many reservations concerning this Holy Fathers liturgical preferences, I think that the melt down mentality is a little over the top. Evveryone knows that Summorum Pontificum is a ticking time bomb when it was published. The cat is out of the bag with the TLM and a restoration of the churches traditions was clearly seen and proposed not imposed to the church. All I can do is speak for myself here. The Extraordinary form is the mass I frequent as much as possible, and quite frankly it wasnt because Pope Benedict imposed it from the top but allowed it to grow from the bottom (what I think Fr. Z is getting at). Now whether or not you like Fr. Z's approach to the SSPX is a personal issue all together. Just look at the progress that has been made in good faith with summorum pontificum of just the last couple of years. We need not get down but continue pressing forward with charity because that will compliment the beauty of the TLM. But thats my thoughts, so w/e

I think there is a type of symbiotic relationship between doctrinal orthodoxy and devotion to liturgical tradition. There may be a delay between eschewing of liturgical tradition and eschewing of doctrinal orthodoxy, or at least in that eschewing becoming clear but eventually there must be such an implosion. Much of the Deposit of Faith can be undermined and overthrown by constant inauthentic liturgy. It has happened to many priests and laity in a gradual way over the past few decades, beginning with liturgical practices which, in themselves, lie about central tenets of the Faith. Many of those who stopped believing didn't even realise it was happening or didn't understand what was happening because they didn't have sufficient intellectual knowledge of the Faith. The beauty and truth bestowed and inculcated by the true liturgy supported by the graces of the sacraments and the true acts of worship occasioned by the authentic liturgy nourished their faith.

backtothefuture saidFor the life of me I don't understand how some prelates have such disdain for such a beautiful mass. It's treated as it were a black mass. This mass has nourished saints, martyrs and virgins. And they brought the table back? ughh"

Yeah, Marini looked like a totally unhappy camper there. At the same time, there were still SIX candles on the altar albeit at strangely odd angles. Hang on folks. The winds of banality are blowing already.

From Whispers in the Loggia: "Even before Election Night ended, the stories of a starkly different style for the 266th pontiff started streaming out: Papa Bergoglio's decision in the Sistine Chapel to shirk the elevated papal throne and stand at ground level to receive the traditional "obedience" of the cardinals, then ditch the Pope's motorcade and ride back to the Domus as he came – with the cardinals on the bus "

Once the papacy abandons its regality, it may be difficult to reclaim. Not good. We officially have a "first among equals."

So I understand correctly, the last Pontificate was a "teaching" Pontificate, no impositions, Papal liturgies can change overnight, nothing is codified or at least you don't have to pay attention to details if you are Pope. Parishes can not implement the Pope's model because they are not supposed to can't afford to. So the model and teaching is not for regular parishes, nor the Papacy. So who is it being taught? If you can't expect continuity liturgically from one Pontificate to another what is all this about teaching and its' benefit? All very disorienting to the simple lay person like myself. Quite hard to believe that something as important to the life of the Church and being a Pope's directives on SP went ignored by the very person who is now Pope.

Wrong of course. The SSPX by not running after the carrot now remains in its previous situation of having nothing to lose. Hate making comparisons, but they are just about the only large organisation in the Church that continues to tell it like it is, and consequently are nobody's bitches

Don M, Yes. You are quite right. The good Fr Z does not seem to accept that the Masses of the FSSPX and all their sacraments have been acknowledged by Rome as valid.

It is a real pity about this, but his idea of SSPX priests - “The entire SSPX should gather in St. Peter’s Square, crawl on hands and knees to the Apostolic Palace and beg the new Pope to allow them to kiss his foot” is gross and rather disrespectful to such orthodox Catholic priest who are dedicated to the "EF"/UA, whatever.

He will take umbrage, but, since I won’t be visiting his religion/coffee/birds site (all of which are individually important in my own life), I won’t know about it.

"[C]ontrary to what common sense dictates and Ecclesia Dei clarified, Father Dotro [the "chaplain" for the Traditional Mass specifically chosen by Abp. Bergoglio] follows the calendar of the Ordinary Form, reading, therefore, the lessons of this form."

Perhaps I am overreacting but I am truly stunned that apparently no one is grasping the significance of these words. I see in them a clear warning that the new Holy Father may soon impose the three-year NO liturgical calendar on the TLM. That would ruin not only the Mass but the Divine Office. That action would send me to the SSPX in an instant.

I suspect that "Fr. Z" reads my remarks here, because he will not accept me on his blog site. No matter. His latest post on the SSPX is too farcical to be taken seriously. It is not the position of the SSPX that is in danger. It is not they who needed to regard the last weeks of the Benedict papacy with urgency and alarm. It is in fact the FSSP whose position is in serious jeopardy. If I were a gambling man, I would wager everything that the priests of the FSSP will be required to celebrate the Novus Ordo, and sooner rather than later. And that will be just the beginning of their crucifixion. The papacy of Francis will, ironically, accomplish exactly the opposite of what he hopes in regards to tradition. He will try to kill the TLM once and for all, but it will thrive. Get ready for an explosion of vocations and transfers to the SSPX.

The SSPX will now get stronger than ever, as more people than ever now know of them. Once these people start reading the material on their websites, many of them will see that the SSPX adheres to traditional teachings and nothing more.

Of the more than twenty liturgical rites in the Church, the man who is now Pope has shown hostility toward only one that I know of. This should be an occasion for traditional Catholics of every stripe to unite in demanding that the Holy Father explain this antagonism. It isn’t right for the Vicar of Christ to show resentment toward a legitimate form of worship – especially one that was practiced by each and every one of his own predecessors.

OK, I'm turning off the comments now (using the comment blocker extension). New Catholic is providing some good information, but too many commenters are having a bad day at the same time.

Really, have some patience, folks. The availability of the traditional Mass spread through hard work over a long period of time. Sure, Papa Francisco seems to be in the liturgical mold of JPII, but let's keep our heads, OK? Is this what the internet has done to us?

I am not Spartacus said, The Brick By Brick Bund was on this faux-fact with facile ferocity and now FR. Z, is asking the SSPX to crawl on its hands and knees and kiss the feet and knees of Our Holy Father. Is there any chance Fr. Z. will abdicate?"

Really? Abdicate from what, his self-righteous little perch, where he has no Canonical obligations to anyone at all, where others pay his way by hand-outs from blog donors who follow him in cultish fashion, and whom condescends Traditionalists like he just knows?

Of the more than twenty liturgical rites in the Church, the man who is now Pope has shown hostility toward only one that I know of. This should be an occasion for traditional Catholics of every stripe to unite in demanding that the Holy Father explain this antagonism. It isn’t right for the Vicar of Christ to show resentment toward a legitimate form of worship – especially one that was practiced by each and every one of his own predecessors.

I wrote Fr. Z this and apparently it will await moderation until doomsday:

"You guys are funny! You seem to think the dispute is personal and that the kissing of some papal body part will erase the doctrinal issues that prevented SSPX from signing off. It isn’t personal. It isn’t over obedience to an individual, even the pope. It’s over doctrine, and obedience to tradition. The three principal differences are clearly rolled out, simply google Gleize Ocariz. If you want a vibrant new evangelization (and souls saved and the Church re-built), the equivocal language of ecumenism found in council documents must be re-written, as several theologians have already concluded (Gherardinni, Radaelli, Amerio, de Mattei, et alles–it’s a whole wave now), ditto for the novelty ‘religious liberty’ and the cancer of collegiality.

Regarding Pope Francis, it might be somewhat more prudent to wait a bit to see, about him. Whether we like him or not doesn’t matter anyway. The authority of a pope does not stem from his spirituality or his doctrine, either, but by his election; if he is a manifest heretic, the cardinals must say so and vote him out again, otherwise whether we find him cool or hot, he is the pope.

That is the teaching of the Church and the weak spot of the bleeps. It is why SSPX is not bleep but cites instead the ‘state of emergency’ by which they explain their vigil at the Church’s door, knocking, to use Bishop Fellay’s image. They will never go away, but they will not come in until there is some movement on the doctrine. And it really matters, most of all to those of us in active ministries where the rubber meets the road and the poison of the Council prevents us from offering the Faith to those who need it most.

Otherwise, why don’t you leave SSPX alone, and concentrate on fixing some things within your own baliwicks."

But you guys censor me too. : )Perhaps I should censor myself more often.

Everyone .. Lets think about it this way. As Pope he has not submitted any proclamation, nor has he appointed anyone to any position which might be detrimental to our cause. Nor has he said anything at all which has been in contradiction to celebrating the true Mass.

At the very least let's not argue about what he might do until he does it. All of the infighting among disparate blogs only gives ammunition to those who would have us fighting with ourselves. All it does is draw attention to our community WHICH IS THE LAST THING WE WANT.

Let's be patient and pray. Facts are facts however we have no facts by which to act in the last 24 hours from our new Pope, with a new name, and a new charge for which to make a claim against those facts.

The Holy Spirit guides the Cardinals, but that does not mean they listen. Nobody should pretend that the choice of Pope is beyond scrutiny.

There is plenty reason to be cautious about Francis. As a Cardinal, he was not just indifferent but outwardly hostile to the Latin Mass, and was prone to involve himself in silly ecumunical publicity stunts.

And I can't help but think of the "Bishop dressed in white" from the revealed part of the Third Secret of Fatima when I look at his apparent allergy to traditional papal vestments. The last thing we need is another Pope who tries to be the "cool guidance counselor".

Yet, I'm hopeful that his humility and devotion to Our Lady, and even his lack of experience in the Curia could be a benefit. If he is truly devoted to Mary, and submissive to the will of God, maybe Russia could finally be consecrated, and maybe genuine house cleaning could happen.

My logic is this. By making an issue out of something which does not exist we allow that issue to be debated and therefor we admit that it can and possibly should be looked at and changed. The church has bigger issues right now which has nothing to do with the TLM.. Let's not shoot off flares and fireworks to draw attention to an issue that does not yet exist.

Until HH says the Mass of ages is not valid we should not argue with ourselves about whether or not he thinks it is. It is valid.

If we make it an issue they might take it away. Let's be quiet. For now.

Be vigilant. Prayerful. Watchful. Hopeful. His homily mentioned those who are not with Christ whether they be priest or Pope.. He was talking to the cardinals... He was telling some of them that they're in trouble. Let's see who he was talking to...

Papa Bergoglio's election means the repudiation of Pope Benedict XVI liturgical vision of the reform of the reform and his theology of the hermeneutic of continuity. It means, in plain and unadulterated words, THE WOLVES/VIPERS/HYENNAS have triumphed for now.

I just can imagine Sodano, Re, Mahoney, Daneels and the rest of the gang are LOLing and ROFLing right now. Meanwhile, Benedict's allies (i.e. Burke, Ranjith, Scola, Pell, et al) must have felt a roundhouse kick to the groin.

New parish priests in Germany waited one year before introducing changes. Benedict XVI did the same in the Vatican. Pope Francisco changed the liturgy at the Sistine Chapel in one day. He does not know ad Orientem, proper Italian or Latin.

I hope Pope Pancho does not sell off the Vatican treasures to some Sheik of Dubai to distribute the proceeds to the poor. Hope he remembers the dignity of his office. With the Vatican II Church we will continue to lose souls. Instead of persecuting the Latin Mass in Bs. As. the Cardinal should have allowed the priest to obey Summorum Pontificum.

Didn't you see how Marini was brushed aside as Francis refused to dress in a traditional manner before going out on the balcony. It is pride masquearding as humility. He is really a dumb clutz in so many areas such as liturgy, theology, ecumanism and discipline. He did little in Argentina to stop sexually active clegy in his diocese. The cardinals are still hanging on to the whole 1970's paradigm. So for 10 years or more we will have to take this pope with a grain of salt.

At least 90 cardinals elected Card. Bergoglio. There were reports in italian Tv that a coalition of Bertone, Dolan and protegees of Sodano blocked the election of Cardinal Angelo Scola who would have followed the path of Benedict XVI.

Perhaps The Bishop dressed in white is The Holy Father who just recently stated that to deny the inherent essence of God, The Blessed Trinity, is to deny the inherent personal and relational Dignity of the human person, created in The Image and Likeness of God.

" Let Us Make man in Our Image." - The Ordered Complementary Communion of Perfect Love that Is The Blessed Trinity.

Those who remain in The Catholic Church physically, having left The Catholic Church spiritually, having denied the inherent personal and relational essence of the human person from the moment of conception, are, in fact, apostates. Every son or daughter of a human person, can only be a human person, and only a man and woman can exist in relationship as husband and wife. No doubt, our Holy Father recognized that we are living in the Time of a Great Apostasy. We will know soon if it is the intention of Pope Francis to bring back The Charitable Anathema and The Altar Rails. The Sacrifice of The Holy Eucharist, Is The Sacrifice of The Most Holy and Blessed Trinity for "God so Loved us that He sent His only Son..."

@Christine states "He is no longer cardinal of one corner of the world. He is Father of the whole Church. The knowledge of this surely weighs on him."

Respectfully, Christine, the Holy Father himself disagrees with you. As we all clearly saw and heard after his election, and his visit to St. Mary M., he considers himself to be only "Bishop of Rome". I expect the last 8 years to be undone very quickly not by leadership from above, but through passive deference to "local churches". It will be interesting to see if all Bishops will be free to do, say and teach as they please - or only the progressive ones, with the hammer falling on Burke et al.

Back to the catacombs for anyone who says "Catholicism is true, other religions are false."

I am a Melkite Catholic, and as someone who has been involved with Latin parishes from time to time, I know the value of good liturgy - irrespective of parish, or rite used. Whatever his past maybe, God has chosen him to a great task. Who are we to judge him unworthy, when it was God who chose him in the first place?

He has asked us first, to pray for him. And if we pray for our priests, surely we can pray for our Pope, who is a bishop just like everyone else. Pray for our Pope, just as you did for Benedict, JPII, your bishop, and every other holy priest. Our Lord calls us to love impartially, and not just love selectively, as that is what sinners do (cf Luke 6:31 - 36). And since we love Christ and the Church, gauging by your passion, PRAY FOR OUR HOLY FATHER.

On a final note, I pledge my allegiance and my unreserved obedience to the Pope of the day, as the Vicar of Christ; whoever he may be. The Holy Spirit has spoken, and may God's work be fulfilled in his chosen, Francis.

Echoing the words of my Patriarch, Gregory III Laham, I also say, "Yes to Christ, and yes to the Pope!".

Colin, respectfully, you are wrong. No one can say any pope was God's choice. There's God's perfect will and His permissive will.

The Holy Ghost offers His guidance to the cardinal electors -- but nowhere does the church say they always accept that guidance. We're not papists believing every pope is fantastic just because he's pope. It's clear the electors in the past have ignored God's Will. Only time will tell on this go around.

The Cardinals have been very naive to have bought into this false simplicity and humility. The very nature of simplicity and humility is that they are not supposed to be noticed or promoted, otherwise its just a show of arrogance. Perhaps Pope Francis is a subversive Jesuit who will give away the Church's assets and reduce the church's power.

Having been poor myself, I can say that any money given to the poor is the same as throwing money into the garbage; the poor need education but if they receive money first they will waste it.

I would think that any bishop with a strong Franciscan mindset is not going to be champion of the TLM. Some Franciscans have embraced the TLM, such as the Franciscans of the Immaculate, but most don't. Franciscanism, at it's core, is the anti-thesis of traditionalism as we know it. It is minimalistic by it's nature, and there has often been animosity between the minimalism of Franciscanism and a more alaborate and materially rich approach to the Faith, especially liturgically. I foresee tough times ahead liturgically for trads. That's just how it's likely to be. But the new Holy Father may bring strengths to the papacy which are much needed, despite the liturgical issues. He is very devoted to the BVM. We can, therefore choose how we will react to the problem. We can approach the problem like mature adults, or like children. Our choice.

Just out of mischievous curiousity, when your partriarch and synod tell you that Florence, Trent and First Vatican aren't true, authentic ecumenical councils, contrary to the expressed will of the popes - even the most recent ones - what do you do then with your unreserved obedience to those in authority above you?

Let us not be guilty of tunnel vision. If Francis is opposed to the Mass of the Ages, there will be trouble in other areas as well. We've already seen it with false ecumenism.

The nature of what is required for salvation -- and the role of actual grace in drawing every living human being to the One True Faith -- is at the heart of the doctrine of the Catholic Church. If Francis doesn't get this right, his persecution of the traditional Mass will be the least of our problems. And since this subject has been taboo within the halls of the Vatican for almost 50 years (except when it's outright been contradicted), I see few reasons for optimism.

"We're not papists believing every pope is fantastic just because he's pope. It's clear the electors in the past have ignored God's Will. Only time will tell on this go around."

Perhaps it is more a question of cooperation with God's Grace rather than ignoring God's Will. Fidelity to Grace is at the heart of spiritual perfection; consequently, unresponsiveness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit will likely harden one's heart or worse lead to lukewarmness.

To say that electors in the past have ignored God's Will seems to suggest that God's Will was made absolutely evident to all the Cardinals in a single moment and they all rejected it. God's Will was presented at the Conclave and 2/3rds majority agreed on what to do with God's Will.

Perhaps it is more like each Cardinal casts an individual vote based on their own cooperation with the Holy Ghost's inspiration. This cooperation is influenced, for good or ill, by the human experience of voting multiple times in succession. The Catholic Church is a Divine and human institution.

I suspect that the Holy Ghost does not ignore the science of the spiritual life and override a Cardinal's track record of infidelity to Grace. So, historically, we see Fat Pope Thin Pope manifested in all sorts of ways.

To restore all things in Christ is not a walk in the park. This is a battle against some serious adversaries with considerable fire-power. You would be hard pressed to name any Pope who managed to restore ALL things during his reign.

God is working out the restoration. Perhaps what Pope St. Pius X saw all around him was so bad, or perhaps the 3rd Secret is so bad, that it will take a few different Popes all with their own particular charism for the Church to arrive at the enthronement of the Immaculate Heart and the universal reign of Christ the King.

Real Catholics know what the end result will be and much of the frustration expressed in the comment box seems to be due to a lack of patience. Patience hath a perfect work.

Pope Francis is God's Will for our time. Hold fast to Tradition but be still and know that I am God.

Jesus didn't have much patience with the moneychangers in the Temple. It may well have been God's will to give us Pope Stephen VI, Pope Formosus, Pope John XII,Pope Benedict IX, Pope Boniface VIII, Pope Urban VI, and Pope Clement VII. Notwithstanding, good men fought against them and resisted rather than meekly getting on board with them. you do what you want, but I intend to battle.

Everyone seems to have forgotten this incident of the homosexual/ transgender celebrities who were allowed to publicize the baptism of their purchased children in the Buenos Aires cathedral last August:

"The elegant Basilica of the Most Holy Sacrament, where perpetual adoration takes place, is one of the preferred churches in Buenos Aires, Argentina, for marriages and ceremonies of high society. On August 25, 2012, the church was the stage for a sequence of scandals.

"Homosexual Roberto Carlos Trinidad submitted himself to surgeries to change his sex and became "Florencia" Trinidad, above at left in the white dress. He/she has lived with another man, Pablo Goycochea, for more than a decade. "Florencia" is a TV star in several series on Telefe - Channel 11 on Buenos Aires television. Some time ago, the homosexual couple adopted (purchased) two children born on the same day from a clinic that does artificial insemination in San Diego, California.

"On the first birthday of the "twins," "Florencia" and her partner decided to have the children baptized. The Catholic religious authorities found nothing better to do than give permission for the ceremony to be performed at the Basilica of the Most Holy Sacrament...

"Thus, after reportedly giving Communion to the homosexual couple, Fr. Jorge Garcia Cuerva, above center, officiated with all pomp and circumstance at the ceremony of Baptism. How can one not see in this broadly publicized event a blatant support of the Catholic Church for homosexual "marriage" and change-of-sexes surgeries?"

http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A487-BsAs-Homo.htm

I point it out because many are emailing me that this pope is "prolife" because he USES the death of 100,000 babies a day by abortion to PROMOTE banning the death penalty (where criminals who have been convicted of capital crimes are executed) and accepting sexual immorality (would pope blanket baptize children of Hindus, atheists, etc.? So why blanket baptize children of 'unmarried mothers' - in order to blanket baptize "children" of parents who sodomize??).

Also if the new pope approves giving holy communion to sodomites, then he ISN'T against gay marriage. And if HOMOS can have holy communion, why not pro-abortion politicians?

In the index of The Three Ages of the Interior Life, by Garrigou-Lagrange, we see the following:

Inspiration; see Holy Ghost.

I too do not want to nitpick; however all I meant by inspiration was probably what you mean by guidance. Nevertheless, I think inspiration is the more accurate term in spiritual theology. Perhaps not, I am not a theologian, just a guy that prays.

Dear Et Cum Spirit 220,

I will continue to do what I have always done ... handing on what was handed to me, my only point was that patience is virtue.

So Bergoglio refused to implement Summorum Pontificum and discouraged the conversion of Anglicans... Is it not ironic that many Catholics will now judge the disobedience of Trads, who will only resisting a Pope who himself demonstrated significant disobedience and disrespect toward his own predecessor? Care to parse that, "Fr. Z"?

Thank you for your patience. I am glad to submit to the wisdom of a traditional moral theologian. Guidance it is.

Just so that I am clear, though, what you are saying is that in the context of the Conclave, the Cardinals are being guided by the Holy Spirit in a different way than occurs in the spiritual life of the individual (like discerning one's vocation, for example)? That this guidance is clearly present to their mind and they reject it? Or, that this guidance is offered but not discernible for some reason?

Honestly, I am just unclear and mean no disrespect. You said: "The Holy Ghost offers His guidance to the cardinal electors [...] It's clear the electors in the past have ignored God's Will."

I am genuinely interested in understanding how God's Will can be known (i.e. "it is God's Will that Cardinal Siri be elected at this Conclave ... now please vote") and rejected in the context of a Conclave.

It is clear that really bad elections have occurred, no doubt about that, I am just intrigued that the cause of these elections were the direct result of being guided by the Holy Ghost to know God's Will and then voting against it.

Perhaps I am out of my league here, but it just seemed more likely that infidelity to Grace would prevent Cardinals from seeing clearly what God's Will is and then voting based on other issues (like politics).

I would be grateful to know more about the specific nature of this guidance you and your friend are referring to.

I realize that this forum is not meant for enduring discussion so I would be happy just for an author or title (or section of St. Thomas) that I can go to for further study.

Found this "cry for help" in some comments section, somewhere:____________________________ 11 March 2013 at 8:25 am

Here in Buenos Aires, saying the OF in Latin is suicidal. The Archbishop and the “establishment” in the Archdiocese have made very clear that the ones who do this are to be considered “cryptolefebvrists”, “not ecclesially minded”, “un pastoral”, “unstable” or something like that. All these terms mean an “ecclesiastical death sentence”. Ad Orientem, in the vernacular or -worse- in Latin- is a sure sentence to ostracism. Priests who dare to do this end up immediately removed from their posts, out of “pastoral” concerns to obscure chaplaincies in the outskirts, hospitals or are denied permission to pursue higher studies. The seam if you dare to wear a cassock. The horror! Sure, there are no legal prohibitions to all this… but nonetheless…

____________________________In the meantime let us continue our prayers for our Holy Father... and for us to be granted badly-needed graces during these times...

My kids are calling so I need to go, but the Holy Ghost always offers His guidance to the electors. But they're fallible men, even on faith and morals. Some sincerely want His guidance and receive it. Some don't ask, etc.

So He offers it, but that doesn't mean they accept it. Same with us and graces.

the Holy Father has the final word. While the resolutions of the Councils of Florence, Trent and Vatican I applied largely to the Western Church to answer the challenges faced by the Western Church, Eastern Catholics are bound to all the decrees of these Councils. This is so because their recapitulations on dogma concerning the sacraments are greatly useful to both the East and the West.

As for Vatican I, our Patriarch Gregory II Youssef participated fully. All he wanted was that the rights, privileges, and dignity of the Eastern Catholic patriarchs be restored. By this he said first and foremost that the Pope has the highest and complete power over the Church. Vatican II completed that.

Our Holy Diocesan TLM was expelled by the new Pastor of San Buenaventura Mission in Ventura California after a 15-year Indult. The new Pastor's name is Father Tom Elewaut, and he defines himself as a Vatican II Priest. Una Voce Ventura meekly accepted a new Chapel in Camarillo arranged by Archbishop Gomez of Los Angeles for our EF community. Seeing what is coming our way I am very happy wise minds accepted the inevitable loss of a 200 year old Mission built by Bl. Junipero Sierra.

With the new Vatican II pope that was elected only few days later we would have been just simply expelled and lost this wonderful traditional mass (now 10 am at St. Mary Magdalene Chapel, Camarillo).